Lord Tebbit is one of Britain's most outspoken conservative commentators and politicians. He was a senior cabinet minister in Margaret Thatcher's government and is a former Chairman of the Conservative Party. He has also worked in journalism, publishing, advertising and was a pilot in the RAF and British Overseas Airways.

David Cameron has chosen to divide his party rather than lead his country

It was a bad night on Monday for the Prime Minister and the Tory whips. The headline figure of a rebellion by 79 Tories understates the size of the rebellion. To that must be added the two tellers, two other backbenchers who voted in both lobbies (the only way an MP can be listed as present and abstaining) and, for whatever reasons, another 12 backbenchers who did not vote at all. As Nick Robinson reported for the BBC, the Government spinmasters had been forecasting that there would be 85 rebels, obviously expecting that the rebellion would really be a goood deal less than that, probably about 50.

Howevever the talking point in the corridors, bars and tearooms of the Palace of Westminster was more about the Prime Minister's sudden decision to elevate a backbench motion which, even had it been passed by a crushing majority, would have had no effect, into a bruising and bitter struggle against most of his own backbenchers and Tory grassroots activists.

Had the debate been left to take place on Thursday, as originally scheduled, when neither the Prime Minister nor the Foreign Secretary would have been present, the little-known Europe Minister David Liddington could have told the Commons that the present Government would, right now, seize any opportunity to repatriate powers from Brussels to Westminster. Then, after the general election, hopefully freed of its the Lib Dem shackles, it would seek a completely new relationship with our European partners and put the outcome of those negotiations to the British people in a referendum. There would have been no big story, no big showdown, no big rebellion and no lasting bitterness. The Lib Dems would not have liked it, but would have had to lump it or jump ship and face the wrath of the country by playing a fools' game, precipitating an election and being wiped out.

Like the attack of the French President Nicolas Sarkozy, the PM's move was a wild lashing out from weakness rather than a mature response from strength. Those on the Continent shouting that in seeking to manage its own affairs Britain is living in the past should remember that our interventions on the Continent of Europe over the last 200 years have been in response to the ambitions of Bonaparte, the Kaiser and Hitler to involve us in their nightmare visions of a European superstate. Sadly, the latest plans for a superstate look all too likely to end in yet another needless European disaster.

What a pity that the Prime Minister should have chosen to divide his party rather than to unite his country. Mr Cameron's leadership is not in danger. There is no palace coup in the offing. However, if not the next leader, the next leader but one of the Conservative Party was in the rebel lobby, the lobby of the men and women who stand by their principles and speak for their constituents – not that of those who stifled their doubts, held their noses and voted for the party leader of the day.

…

Despite the headline over my blog of last Tuesday, I was not asking anyone to define multiculturalism for me. My views on that were expressed in my blogs of January 9 and of February 7, both of which attracted similar abuse from many of the same people who are incapable of or unwilling to read what I wrote. As ever, I will ignore the foul mouths who cannot cope with either reading or the self-discipline needed in a civilised society.

Sadly, all too many of you were willing, or able, to distinguish between ethnicity, nationality and culture. Unless one can get to that first base, there is little hope of understanding the broader issues.

I thought that marlborough expressed it clearly enough with his observation that a society is defined by its culture. Quite so, and unless it is accepted by all who live within a territory or jurisdiction that the norms of public conduct should conform to that culture, there will be conflict. As kevin 1972 put it multiculturalism means a society with no over riding culture and all cultures regarded as of equal value. That is a recipe for tension and dispute.

However, as opened palm perceived, my blog was about the confusion which exists in Government, rather than the merits or demerits of either multiculturalism or the homogenous society. As stephanie noted, multiculturalism means different things to different people and to oppose it does not need to extend to opposition to marriage across racial or cultural boundaries. I might add that a person's feelings about it may differ according to whether the culture of the place where they live at the time is theirs, or of an aggressive foreign style.

I have to disagree with darkseid about Switzerland: there may be several languages spoke there but there is an underlying common culture. Nor do I think he is right to say that I have "encouraged BNP and racist sub-humans". Had I supported their claim to their culture (which I did not) that would of course have been to support multiculturalism.

As usual assegai was plain silly to say that I was trying to depict Lord Harries as an opponent of multiculturalism. Of course I was not.

I was grateful to both vaselino and jayfromphilly for their calm and kind remarks amongst a rather unattractive brew of posts. It was hard to know whether to laugh or cry at Dobbs' utterance that "socialism is freedom". He might try living under it some time.

Finally, it is not often that I have had cause to correct Laveen Ladharam on a matter of fact, but if he would go back to the Sun newspaper article in which Mr Cameron gave a cast iron pledge to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty he will find there was no caveat at all of any kind. One might argue that he would have been wise to have said "unless it has already been ratified", but he did not. That of course strengthens the case I made in my blog and in my Telegraph article on Friday, that this Government really does not think things through.

Perhaps we should all go away and have a quiet drink (sorry about that to my Muslim friends, but it is part of the established culture here) and relax a little in a friendly discussion about the European Union and its culture.